remedy optimization through remediation system evaluations
TRANSCRIPT
Remedy Optimization through Remediation System Evaluations
(RSEs)Carlos Pachon
USEPA Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology
Innovation
24 September, 2010
Douglas Sutton, Ph.D., PEGeoTrans, Inc
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER)
• Develops standards and regulations for hazardous and non-hazardous waste (RCRA)
• Promotes resource conservation and recovery (RCRA)
• Cleans up contaminated property and prepares it for reuse (Brownfields, RCRA, Superfund, UST)
• Helps to prevent, plan for, and respond to emergencies (Oil spills, chemical releases, decontamination)
• Promotes innovative technologies to assess and clean up contaminated soil, sediment, and water at waste sites (Technology Innovation)
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI)
Technology Innovation Field Services Division (TIFSD)• OSRTI - implements and manages Superfund program• TIFSD Core Mission:
– Advancing best practices in site cleanup– Technology support to EPA Regional project managers, states,
local governments, tribes– Informational support to cleanup community at large
• Primary activity areas to advance mission:– Evaluate and document innovative technologies– Transfer knowledge through publications, training, internet, etc.– Provide direct technical support at sites in Superfund,
Brownfields, RCRA and UST– Manage analytical services for the Superfund program
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Responsible Party/Owner
Operator
State/Federal Project
Manager
Consulting Engineer
Tech
nolo
gy V
endo
rs
Local officials
Developers
Lenders
Community
Target Audience
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
5
Presentation Overview
• The Business Case for Remedy Optimization
• Optimization and RSE Basics• RSE Case Studies
• Strategies, Tools, and Technologies• EPA Optimization Update
• Questions
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
THE BUSINESS CASE FOR REMEDY OPTIMIZATION
WITH RSES
6
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Business Case
• Optimization is low cost relative to cost of remedy• Excellent return on investment• Additional savings from continued optimization throughout remedy
7
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Business Case
• Identifies potential liabilities • Improves site conceptual model
• Site team and management provided with a valued third-party perspective– Provides confidence in path forward– Provides a structured strategy for moving forward– Weighs pros and cons of various options– Builds consensus among various stakeholders– Balances technical input from sole site contractor
• Cross-pollinates expertise among sites
8
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
9
Business CaseTrends in RODs and Decision Documents Selecting Groundwater Remedies (FY 1986 - 2008)
Total Groundwater RODs and Decision Documents = 1,727
Fiscal Year
28%28%26%
2%
94%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
GW P&T
GW In Situ Treatment
GW MNA
GW Containment Vertical Engineered Barrier
GW Other
Per
cent
age
of A
ll G
roun
dwat
er
RO
Ds
and
Dec
isio
n D
ocum
ents
*Groundwater Other includes institutional controls and other remedies not classified as treatment, MNA, or containment. *Note: Other remedies selected prior to 1998 may be under represented in figure. *RODs and decision documents may be counted in more than one category.*RODs from FY1986 - 2004 include RODs and ROD amendments.*Decision documents from FY2005 - 2008 include RODs, ROD amendments, and select ESDs.
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
OPTIMIZATION AND RSE BASICS
10
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
11
EPA’s Definition of Optimization
Comprehensive and systematic review of a site’s past, current, and planned clean-up activities by a team of independent
technical experts to identify protectiveness improvements, cost
efficiencies, and opportunities for early site closure.
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
What are Your Objectives?
• Why are you interested in optimization?– Do you manage a single site?– Do you manage a portfolio of sites?– Are you the regulated party, the regulator, or both?
• Optimization of many sites yields lessons learned for optimizing a program
• An optimized remedy is in the eyes of the beholder
12
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Remediation Strategies
13
Remediation Strategy Depends on Remedy Objectives and Drivers
Party Common Drivers Common Remedial Strategies
Private Responsible Party (RP)
• Reduce liability• Reduce uncertainty• Control costs
• Control/contain• Identify/eliminate liability• Avoid uncertainty• Avoid capital intensive projects*
Regulator
• Protect human health and the environment
• Ensure cleanup. What if RP becomes insolvent?
• Identify/eliminate liability• Intensive characterization• Aggressive remediation
Large Organizations
• Reduce liability• Control costs• Find a better way
• Control/contain• Identify/eliminate liability• Invest in new technologies
* Especially if outcome is uncertain or not guaranteed
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
RSE Origins
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers developed the process and a set of corresponding checklists in 2000 to…– Ensure clear remedial objectives– Evaluate protectiveness– Reduce costs– Ensure adequate maintenance of government-owned
equipment
• www.environmental.usace.army.mil/rse.htm
14
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
RSE Principles
15
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
16
RSE Logistics
* 1 to 1.5 site meeting or conference call depending on remedy complexity
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
RSE Logistics
17
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
RSE Logistics
18
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
RSE Logistics: Typical Report Sections
19
Convey that the evaluation team understands the site
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Working an RSE into the O&M Phase
• RSEs are…– Conducted during the O&M phase– Best suited for long-term remedies– Not direct observations of daily work practices
• When is the best time to conduct an RSE?– After operational data is available– In conjunction with other reviews or milestones– In advance of transferring remedy between parties– During budget updates– 5 years after previous review
20
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Conducting an RSE: Typical Agenda
21
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Conducting an RSE: Typical Agenda(continued)
22
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Conducting an RSE: Typical Agenda (continued)
23
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Conducting an RSE: Typical Agenda(continued)
24
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Conducting an RSE: Typical Agenda (continued)
25
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Conducting an RSE: Typical Questions
• What is the conceptual model for the site? – How did we arrive at the current conditions? – Consider sources, hydrogeology, geochemistry, influence of
remedies.
• What are existing data gaps in the site conceptual model?
• What specific evidence indicates that the remedy is performing as intended?
• Are current conditions the same as design conditions?• What are the remedial objectives?
– Are they still relevant and appropriate?
26
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Conducting an RSE: Typical Questions
• What was the reasoning for each remedy component during design? – Are those reasons still appropriate given current
conditions?
• At what point can each treatment component be discontinued?
• What aspect of the remedy creates the biggest headaches and consumes the most time?
• How is each sample result or data measurement used in evaluating remedy performance?
27
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Conducting an RSE: Example Questioning
28
What non-required monitoring is conducted?
• Weekly off-site• Every 2 hours on-site while staffed• Autosampler hourly
How consistent are results? • Very consistent
How do you operate plant? • ORP and turbidity meters
How are on-site samples used? • They are recorded
What is LOE for on-site analysis?
• 2-4 hours per day plus data management
What is cost of autosampler? • Cost and repair frequency is increasing
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
RSE Follow Through
• The traditional RSE is complete after the final report is submitted.
29
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
RSE Follow Through
Answers…• Follow-up with project owner and site team.
• Suggested time frames…– 3 months after final report is submitted– 1 year after final report is submitted– Additional follow-up as indicated by these calls
• Appropriate for the RSE team to continue providing technical support – Interpreting recommendations– Interpreting results from implementing recomendations
30
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
RSE Challenges
• It is natural for the site consultant to feel threatened
• There is often reluctance to abandon current practices
• Data quality and reporting varies from site to site, sometimes recommendations are constrained to collecting more data
• RSEs are “one-time” events. More influence from the RSE team is sometimes needed to overcome current site practices.
31
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
RSE CASE STUDIES
32
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Case Study #1 – Baird & McGuire
• P&T System – RSE during year 6 of O&M• Remedy protective but excessive cost ($3.4 million per year)
– Labor intensive on-site laboratory – 24-hour operation and 24-hour manned security – Inefficient treatment process for removing organic compounds– Significant oversight costs for limited effort
33
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
34
Case Study #1 – Baird & McGuire(continued)
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Case Study #1 – Baird & McGuire(continued)
• Representative recommendations– Eliminate on-site laboratory and send samples off-site– Automate plant to reduce on-site operator time– Modify security program– Modify inefficient treatment components
• Outcome– Plant automated– Most other major recommendations implemented – As of 2009, continuing to address inefficient treatment components– Annual costs cut to under $1 million per year
35
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Case Study #2 – GCL Tie & Treating
• Evaluation conducted early in LTRA (operating P&T system)
• Former wood-treating facility with existing soil remedy
36
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Case Study #2 – GCL Tie & Treating (continued)
• Results of evaluation
– Remedy generally protective but suggested vapor intrusion evaluation and a few additional monitoring wells
– Costs for long-term monitoring were excessive
– Pumping could be discontinued from the intermediate zone, allowing discontinuation of green sand filtration
– GAC alone is more efficient than air stripping and GAC
– Site owner paying for GAC that was not used because GAC was included in fixed-price bid
37
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Case Study #2 – GCL Tie & Treating (continued)
• Representative recommendations
– Re-bid groundwater monitoring
– Adjust groundwater monitoring program
– Stop pumping from intermediate zone
– Bypass air stripper
– Bid uncertain items as time and materials, not fixed-price
• Outcome
– Above items implemented, but cost savings not yet quantified
– Potential savings of close to $200,000 per year are expected
38
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Case Study #3 – SMS Instruments
• Evaluation conducted in year 9 before transfer to another party
• VOCs treated with air stripping
• Small plume that was mostly remediated except for lingering concentrations in one well
• Fairly simple treatment system – Operates for a relatively high cost (~$378,000 per year)– Was able to operate for as little as $260,000 during one year
when funding was limited
• Data not thoroughly reviewed/evaluated
39
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Case Study #3 – SMS Instruments(continued)
• Representative recommendations
– Improve data analysis/reporting
– Reduce operator labor and PM budget
– Adjust monitoring program
– Investigate and remediate potential residual source
• Outcome
– Source area identified
– Air sparging system implemented
– P&T discontinued within 6 months
– Air sparging O&M costs $30,000 per year
– Active remediation discontinued in 2007
40
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Case Study #4 – Unnamed Site
• P&T system recovering chlorinated solvents– Extraction in source area within slurry wall and of
diffuse plume outside of slurry wall– Air stripping with on-site regeneration of vapor GAC– Discharge of treated water to infiltration gallery
• Data and O&M reports not thoroughly reviewed
41
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Case Study #4 – Unnamed Site(continued)
• RSE Finding
– Occasional exceedances of discharge criteria that were not highlighted
– Discussion with plant operator• Steam regeneration system would not shut down
• Condensing steam would fill solvent storage tank
• Operator would run liquid in solvent storage tank through air stripper to remove excess water before disposal
• Air stripper not designed to treat that level of contamination
42
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
43
Case Study #5 – Unnamed Site• P&T system intended for source control
GW No Data
P&T Begins
Cleanup criteria
• Decline in contamination consistent with P&T operation
• Free product observed downgradient of highway
• Contamination still above criteria
Source
Extraction Wells
Injection Wells
MonitorWell
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Case Study #5 – Unnamed Site (continued)
• Productive aquifer and little soil organic carbon to adsorb contamination
• Concern about potential source under highway
• Extraction rates not known at each extraction well
• Treated water reinjected to flush presumed contamination beneath highway
• Why is monitor well still contaminated?
• Design documents did not adequately determine extraction rates needed for capture
44
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Case Study #5 – Unnamed Site (continued)
• RSE team reviewed all data and used MODFLOW to simulate extraction and injection with site parameters
– RSE team concluded MW contamination likely because of incomplete capture
– RSE team recommended adjustments to detect remaining MW contamination
• If remaining MW contamination caused by
– Incomplete capture: source area can be easily removed and P&T system shut down
– Source under highway: extraction system would likely need to be moved downgradient
45
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
• P&T system to contain VOC contamination from landfill, concern regarding plume capture
Case Study #6 – Unnamed Site
46
Creek
Alternate discharge point
not modeled
Simulated groundwater flow direction
Alternate (not simulated)
groundwater flow direction
MW-25MW-32
MW-31
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
47
Case Study #6 – Unnamed Site (continued)
• Are extraction trenches deep enough?
• Is extraction rate high enough?
• Is pumping allocated correctly?
Extraction Trenches
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Case Study #6 – Unnamed Site(continued)
• RSE team recommendations:– Horizontal and vertical delineation with direct-push
– Direct push to investigate other potential nearby sources
– New piezometers for more water level measurements
– Shut down test of extraction system
– Model correction/redevelopment
• Site team developed sampling plan according to RSE recommendations
• RSE team has reviewed and worked with site team to optimize sampling plan
48
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Brief Summary of RSE Results
49
Eliminate or confirm no…Cost Savings Opportunities…
COST PROTECTIVENES
Based on analysis of 52 RSEs
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
STRATEGIES, TOOLS, AND TECHNOLOGIES
50
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Lessons Learned from Case Studies
• Some original designs prove to be appropriate, some do not
• Regardless of quality of original design– Site conditions change during operation– O&M yields data not available at the time of the design
• Common for site operators to “operate” remedy but not “evaluate” remedy
• Routine nature of O&M results in “business as usual”
• Good evaluation requires various areas of expertise
• Change or desire for change often comes from the top down
• Contractors/consultants are often resistant to change…. It affects revenue and jobs
51
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Lessons Learned from Case Studies (continued)
• Most significant recommendations come from the evaluation team asking itself a few basic questions– How does operational data change the site conceptual
model?– Is the remedy performing as designed?– Are the designed and actual remedies appropriate for
given site conditions?– What has changed since design?– Are there alternatives to this remedy?– Are there alternatives to this remedy component?– Is there a remaining source material? Can it be removed?
52
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Lessons Learned from Case Studies (continued)
• A few more basic questions…– How is this particular data point used to evaluate the
remedy?– Have I looked at all of the data?– For uncertain items, what do converging lines of evidence
suggest?– What are the major cost drivers?– How does this site compare to similar sites?– What natural process are we fighting? Can they work to
our advantage?– Are contract terms unfavorable or limiting to remedy
owner?
53
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
54
Tools:Relevant EPA Documents
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Tools: The RSE Team Technical Skill Set
Ability to use MODFLOW or similar software for conceptual modeling
BIOSCREEN and BIOCHLOR for evaluating attenuation
Johnson-Ettinger for screening vapor intrusion
Excel for generating plots
Contouring software for interpretation
Long-term monitoring optimization software
Sustainability footprint analysis spreadsheets
Cost estimating software
Vendor software
55
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Technologies: Using Vendors Effectively
• New or different remedial options should be tested• Bench scale testing is effective to see if technology is
technically appropriate and if full-scale costs are reasonable• Use caution in initiating costly pilot tests
– Is there some certainty that full-scale costs are reasonable?
– Will technology represent a clear improvement over status quo?
– Is level of uncertainty in potential full-scale results acceptable?
– Has technology been proven in bench scale tests or at similar sites?
– Can you interview other sites where technology has been applied?
– Will the vendor offer a performance guarantee?
56
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Technologies: RSE Team Skill Set
• Expertise with the following technologies:– Various treatment above-ground treatment components– Reagents for in-situ remedies– Delivery mechanisms for in-situ remedies– Methods for expedited additional characterization
• Expertise with the following topics:– Water treatment and remedial engineering– Hydrogeology– Geochemistry– Biochemistry– Cost– Other areas
57
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
EPA OPTIMIZATION UPDATE
58
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
History of EPA Optimization
59
• Optimization at EPA
– Began with application of optimization software to pumping scenarios for P&T systems
– Review of data for software optimization highlighted larger issues
– EPA adopted the use of the RSE from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
History of EPA Optimization(continued)
60
2000 2001 2002 2003 20072004 20062005 2008 2009 2010
Initial Pilot
Expanded Pilot Formal Action
Plan
Regional Pilot
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
History of EPA Optimization(continued)
• Other forms of EPA optimization
– Independent Design Review (IDR) process initiated in 2007 in response to RSE findings from previous years
– Investigation Process Optimization (IPO) developed concurrently with RSE for optimization of investigation process
– Long-term monitoring optimization, specifically aimed at optimizing long-term monitoring
61
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Future EPA Optimization
62
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Future EPA Optimization (continued)
• A National Optimization Strategy that…– Institutionalizes optimization across program
– Expands optimization to more sites
– Uses the optimization tools, lessons learned, & expertise of OSRTI
– Leverages Regional and OSRTI resources
– Expands pool of qualified optimization contractors
– Develops Regional optimization programs
– Involves OSRTI and Regional management
– Has clear comprehensive, nationwide objectives
– Tracks results for all sites
• One year of planning plus one addition year for ramp up63
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Information and Resources
• EPA’s optimization clearinghouse
www.cluin.org/optimization
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers RSE checklists
http://www.environmental.usace.army.mil/rse_checklist.htm
64
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
Contact Information
• Carlos Pachon, U.S. EPA Office of Superfund Remediation and
Technology [email protected]
• Douglas Sutton, Ph.D., PEGeoTrans, [email protected]
65
ConSoil 2010 ConSoil 2010 •• Salzburg Congress, Austria Salzburg Congress, Austria •• 2222--24 September 201024 September 2010
Remedy Optimization through RSEs
QUESTIONS???
66